188
188
Dec 7, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 188
favorite 0
quote 0
what that really means is all tax rates on all americans go back up because the tax rates were brought down in 2001 and 2003. i don't support that. i don't think that's a great idea. it would slow down the economy. >> when you look at economist's evaluations, it would slouw dow the economy. it would. there's no question about it. but if the problem is that we have a lot of debt and there has to be some pain whether it be in cuts or the form of higher tax revenues, it means there has to be some pain. $2.8 trillion. that's 17% of our debt wiped out overnight. if you're worried about the debt, how can't you look at that seriously? >> well, the reason i would say it's not going to be 17% of our debt on that because right now, we're running a trillion dollar deficit year single year. if we went back to zero, we're rebalanced. right now with the fourth year in a row, that deficit and debt continues to climb. so it doesn't really wipe it out and the challenge of it is what does that do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase as well. a lot of people lose track of
what that really means is all tax rates on all americans go back up because the tax rates were brought down in 2001 and 2003. i don't support that. i don't think that's a great idea. it would slow down the economy. >> when you look at economist's evaluations, it would slouw dow the economy. it would. there's no question about it. but if the problem is that we have a lot of debt and there has to be some pain whether it be in cuts or the form of higher tax revenues, it means there has to be...
188
188
Dec 4, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 188
favorite 0
quote 0
you said, i'm all for the wealthy paying more taxes. so i'm curious, since you've said that, why the reduck tans to just raise the tax rate on the wealthy? >> it destroys growth of the very people who are going to create additional revenues in the future. >> why say you would be all for it? >> i didn't ever say -- not one timedy say i was for raising tax rates on the wealthy. i said i was for increasing the taxes that the wealthy paid. how you do it will have a major impact on the economic fortunes of this country. and if you take the vast majority of small businessmen who will be hit with an increased tax rate, you're going to markedly decrease the job creation and capital formation in this country. >> let me ask you another question, one of the things we talked about on both sides, i think it's fair to say is the lack of details. and second geithner was out trying to defend some of the details in his plan over the weekend. this letter also has very few details. i'm curious to know exactly what loopholes, what deductions would you kill
you said, i'm all for the wealthy paying more taxes. so i'm curious, since you've said that, why the reduck tans to just raise the tax rate on the wealthy? >> it destroys growth of the very people who are going to create additional revenues in the future. >> why say you would be all for it? >> i didn't ever say -- not one timedy say i was for raising tax rates on the wealthy. i said i was for increasing the taxes that the wealthy paid. how you do it will have a major impact on...
178
178
Nov 30, 2012
11/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 178
favorite 0
quote 0
whey too high on taxes. not nearly enough on spending reductions. >> the president has said all the way along, if i give you a dollar of revenue, if you guys give me a dollar of revenue, that's $3 trillion in spending cuts. he's coming in with 400, so would you try to get him to 3 trillion here or try to bring down the revenue number? >> well, i think you have to bring down the revenue number. we are not going to tax and spend our way back into economic prosperity in this country. we are going to have to work together. i think most americans are tired of seeing the partisanship and debates. i'm pleased the speaker's up at the white house to find a solution. most people want certainty, long-term predictability in the economy and raising taxes for this amount i think would put us back into a recession and be counterproductive to get our economy going on. >> john boehner clearly, he's the key negotiator. are you going to agree to whatever deal he brings you, if he says representative yoder, it's $1.4 trillion i
whey too high on taxes. not nearly enough on spending reductions. >> the president has said all the way along, if i give you a dollar of revenue, if you guys give me a dollar of revenue, that's $3 trillion in spending cuts. he's coming in with 400, so would you try to get him to 3 trillion here or try to bring down the revenue number? >> well, i think you have to bring down the revenue number. we are not going to tax and spend our way back into economic prosperity in this country....
699
699
Dec 1, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 699
favorite 0
quote 0
his plan taxes $1.6 trillion of taxes. higher tax rates on people, families making more than $250,000 as well as closing loopholes, limiting deductions, raising the estate tax rate and increasing the taxes on capital gains and dividends. and the plan spends nearly $200 billion. another stimulus package of 50 billion. an extension of unemployment insurance benefits estimated around $30 billion and an extension of the payroll tax cut estimated at about $114 billion. but the geithner plan didn't cut spending. in return for all of that, the president offered $400 billion in cuts to medicare and other entitlement programs. today john boehner basically said, go fish. >> was not a serious proposal. and so, right now, we're almost nowhere. >> just when we needed someone to not say hey, mom, he was nasty so i can be, too. boehner, like geithner, leapt to the extreme. republicans, the best response to a nonstarter could be to put a real thoughtful compromise deal on the table. an alternative. and as for mr. geithner, he wasn't alone
his plan taxes $1.6 trillion of taxes. higher tax rates on people, families making more than $250,000 as well as closing loopholes, limiting deductions, raising the estate tax rate and increasing the taxes on capital gains and dividends. and the plan spends nearly $200 billion. another stimulus package of 50 billion. an extension of unemployment insurance benefits estimated around $30 billion and an extension of the payroll tax cut estimated at about $114 billion. but the geithner plan didn't...
112
112
Dec 6, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 112
favorite 0
quote 0
means everybody's taxes go up, but if the president has his way, taxes are going to go up on those very wealthy folks making over 200,000, but most are small businesses filing a subchapter s companies, about 88% of net small business income will be for these taxes when we're depending on them to create two-thirds of the new jobs. boehner's trying to mitigate that mess. i wish him luck. something's going to f to have to give. >> from everything i've heard is that we are realistically, there's two options for country. one, go over the cliff. the other, extend the bush tax cuts for the 98% of americans. everyone who makes under $200,000 a year if they're single. those seem to be the two choices. between those, which do you pick? >> but, if we do that and raise the taxes on those small businesses we were just talking about, according to the congressional budget office, that's going to be about 200,000 american families are going to be out of work next year and that's the low estimate. young is estimating about 700,000 more unemployed. that's a lot of hurt for the middle class, so this is a
means everybody's taxes go up, but if the president has his way, taxes are going to go up on those very wealthy folks making over 200,000, but most are small businesses filing a subchapter s companies, about 88% of net small business income will be for these taxes when we're depending on them to create two-thirds of the new jobs. boehner's trying to mitigate that mess. i wish him luck. something's going to f to have to give. >> from everything i've heard is that we are realistically,...
133
133
Dec 5, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 133
favorite 0
quote 0
that is 98% of the american people, getting about 80% of this tax cut shouldn't have their taxes raised. so my suggestion -- it was delivered, by the way, in private and leaked and put in public. but that's fine. i mean, it's certainly what i said. my suggestion was let's take the one area that we agree and take it off the table. >> and -- but just to be clear, though, you actually think -- because this is when i saw your comment what i was so curious about, just from a negotiating standpoint. we had the super committee that failed, now we have the fiscal cliff, right? and if those sorts of deadlines aren't enough to get a deal, if you actually were -- were going to break with your own party or say go ahead, we'll extend them for the middle class, do you actually think that you would be able to negotiate a deal where they didn't go up on the top 2% at the beginning of the year? >> you might be able to negotiate that deal. again, i think a lot of people misunderstand, you know, what's happening with the 98%. number one, i don't think you ever ought to use the american people as, quote, l
that is 98% of the american people, getting about 80% of this tax cut shouldn't have their taxes raised. so my suggestion -- it was delivered, by the way, in private and leaked and put in public. but that's fine. i mean, it's certainly what i said. my suggestion was let's take the one area that we agree and take it off the table. >> and -- but just to be clear, though, you actually think -- because this is when i saw your comment what i was so curious about, just from a negotiating...
200
200
Dec 4, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 200
favorite 0
quote 0
taxes and spending. what is an agreement that both sides can say yes, we each gave a little? >> the republicans must agree to higher tax rates on well off americans. all the way to the 39.6 that the president, they have to. that's the ticket for admission because the president won the election and campaigned on that. the democrats are going to have to agree. they'll use uf -- and that means health care for seniors and poor people and special needs kids. that is not an easy thing to ask anybody to do, let alone the democratic party. which really created these programs. this is going to be awful and gruesome, but 70 for 60 in your poll, 60% of americans want to raise taxes on well off americans. 70% don't want to cut or 80, don't want to cut medicare or medicaid, so the hard stuff is coming. this is the easy stuff. >> we're out of time, guys. nice to talk to you. i appreciate it. >>> next, violent clashes along the turkey, syria border and a new heir to the british throne is on the way. our piers morgan wi
taxes and spending. what is an agreement that both sides can say yes, we each gave a little? >> the republicans must agree to higher tax rates on well off americans. all the way to the 39.6 that the president, they have to. that's the ticket for admission because the president won the election and campaigned on that. the democrats are going to have to agree. they'll use uf -- and that means health care for seniors and poor people and special needs kids. that is not an easy thing to ask...
62
62
tv
eye 62
favorite 0
quote 0
raising taxes would. there's no question about it, but if the problem is that we have a lot of debt and there has to be some pain, whether in cuts or the form of higher tax revenues, that means there has to be pain. look at the math. $2.8 trillion to go back to the clinton era rates. that's 17% of debt wiped out overnight. if you're worried about the debt, how can't you look at that seriously? >> the reason i would say it's not 17% of our debt because right now we have a trillion dollar deficit every single year. if we went back to zero, that's true. right now with fourth year in a row with over a trillion dollars in deficit spending, that deficit and debt continues it to climb. it doesn't wipe it out. what does it do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase right now. the affordable care act actually begin on january 1st as well for people making $200,000 or more or people with large medical bills. that already starts coming up. this is an additional tax increase on top of tha
raising taxes would. there's no question about it, but if the problem is that we have a lot of debt and there has to be some pain, whether in cuts or the form of higher tax revenues, that means there has to be pain. look at the math. $2.8 trillion to go back to the clinton era rates. that's 17% of debt wiped out overnight. if you're worried about the debt, how can't you look at that seriously? >> the reason i would say it's not 17% of our debt because right now we have a trillion dollar...